The Vulgar VIP Culture

When Indian caste system became stable it suddenly became rigid, and people stayed where they were born. Although hierarchy was rigid in both classical societies, they developed stable social classes that produced various kinds of people: the most important being the farmers.

British imperialism had a negative impact on the politics of India because of the establishment of the framework for India that leads to their downfall and the Indian Army which they used to control their own kind. According to Dr.Lalvani, the British established the framework for India’s justice system, civil services, loyal army, and the efficient loyal police. (Paragraph #6). While this is true, the framework didn’t include the Indians, because “Of 960 civil offices, 900 are occupied by English men and 60 by natives”(Doc. #2). British laws often benefited the British and were designed to limit the freedom of speech of the Indians, for example, the Rowlatt Act in 1919. (Gandhi). This evidence shows that the British, when creating the framework for the new and improved India wanted to benefit from it while trying to lower the Indian’s and limit the

India had a Caste system, with thousands of different casts, but at the very top were the Brahmins, and at the very bottom were the untouchables. This system eliminated the need for a very big

Even if people were in poverty and couldn’t manage getting food on their tables- they were still demanding money. Where was the “civility” or “justice”?. Because of the British taking control of India’s government and forcing them into poverty, their imperial rule gave India an extremely negative

Dr. Lalvani claims that “Indians success, is largely due to British imperial rule.” The British didn't just establish the framework for the justice system for India but it established the civil service, loyal army and efficient police force (Document

Indian serfs have to prove loyalty to their masters and all of them are trapped under what Adiga refers to “The Rooster Coop”. This is the way of how Indian society is structured in which the well-off and the poor cannot amalgamate with each other. And this system ensures complete control for the upper classes, transforming the lives of the employees a prison. The master-servant relationship is established based on this philosophy which permits to maintain the endless servitude of the lower classes and providing wealth for a dominant

The only thing they had an interest in was their own profit and not the well-being of Indians. Lalvani said that the British’s push to make India a great country was “superbly efficient” and maybe it was, but like Gandhi says in Document 1, “You have given us no responsibility of our own government.” The people of India never got to prove themselves; Britain was already so advanced before that, that India had no time to play catch up or stand up for themselves. Britain created the foundation for India’s various government systems (Lalvani). Out of the 960 civil offices, 900 of them had British tenants (Doc 2). So in a since it is true that Britain set up the systems but it also shows that there was an unequal say in how India should have been governed and gave no Indians any room to help. Keeping in mind the Englishmen had no genuine interest in India’s people which led to even more unjust laws natives had to comply

British Imperialism had a negative impact on the politics of India because the British took away control of the country for their benefit and enforced laws that discriminated against Indians. Lavani claims the British “established the framework for India’s justice system, civil service, loyal army, and efficient police force.” However, this framework was not intended for the Indians, but for the British. For example, 94% of government positions were held by Englishman (Doc. #2). These people had “no permanent interest in their well-being” and returned to England after “forty-five or fifty-five years of age with large pensions (Doc. #2).” This shows the British government used India as a source of wealth and controlled the people without

While the British Imperial rule established the framework for India's justice system. They also created the Indian army and created military academies to train officers. This lead to the British controlling the Indian government, as well as their army. The British Imperial rule established the framework of indians justice system. However the framework did not include many Indians, 900 british and 60 Indians(Gandhi). (Doc #2)The British

In the case of politics in Africa and India, both were completely different because of how they were ruled by the European nations. In Africa the natives thought they had political power, but the reality was that all politics, and decisions were made by the European’s. The natives thought that the leaders, and chiefs were making the decisions, but the indirect governing style the Europeans were using on their territories was to do exactly this. They tricked the public to keep the peace and avoided any revolts or rebellion from taking place in the country. The same cannot be said about India though. In India the direct governing style was in place. This meaning that all the previous leaders, and officials were replaced by the European officials,

Though it is a fact that the British in India administered an efficient government and civil services, these actions ultimately hurt the Indians because of the British dominated parliament and the administration of oppressive laws. Dr. Lalvani claims that while in power, the British governed 500 million people of diverse religions in a “superbly efficient” manor. The reason that British India was efficient was because the British held complete control. The Indian government contained only 6% of native Indian officials, while the overwhelming majority were British foreigners (Doc #2). This lead to laws that hurt the Indians and helped the British such as laws like the Salt Act that devastated Indian taxes and revenue (Doc #2). This is significant because it does not matter if the British government was effective if it oppressed the Indian majority with little representation and unfair laws.

India like the United States has a Democracy for their form of Government. India is a free nation with rights given to the people and laws to protect them. Although India’s Democracy is not exactly like the United States it is set up very similar. In the book Sarah doesn’t talk about India’s Government and never runs into any trouble by authorities, although she does mention that India has a Democracy. This means India is a free nation and allows people to have opportunities for individuals to decide which ones they would like to take. Within the Democracy, India like the U.S. has a strongly defined cast system.

Throughout the years many historians have compilated and examined why Indian people were so desperate to gain back their independence from the British Empire during their rule over India, from 1612 to 1947. The reasoning can most definitely be found as the British discriminated against Indian people as they believe that they were inferior; it is no surprise that Indian people fought so hard for their independence. Throughout the British Raj, they placed and put forward unbelievably racist acts and laws which discriminated against Indian people. Which of course led to Indians to rebel against the British rule and which the British reacted with causing massacres. Explaining the nationalistic many India’s felt during the British Raj.

In ancient India and China a social system was developed to separate the society into levels. This social system is called a caste system. Which caste level you belong to was determined by your occupation and family origin. If you were born the son of a king your life was grand. But, if you were born to a farmer you are a farmer for life. Your birth determines where you fall in the caste system, and you live according to the rules. Both ancient India and China had the caste system. Ancient India and China had similarities and differences in the caste system.

     India was an ancient civilization that had many rulers and empires. The first rulers were the Harappans. They ruled from 3500 BC through 1500 BC. The Aryans took over the Harappan empire around 1500 BC. Then, Alexander the Great came and took over control of India. After ruling for only a couple of years, he died. A few years later the Mauryan Empire took over. Next was the Ashoka. Finally, the Guptas ruled from 320 BC through 535 AD.